French Website Translation


Lire ce site en francais

Translated from French electronically, contains poor grammar and misspellings.

Pentagon surveillance cctv 2001/9/11 :
here is the fraud !

I changed my mind

Instead of "here is the fraud !", this web site's title ended first with "where are the missing frames ?". I kept to archives the old version. of the site, in which I tried to settle several hypotheses on the pentagon's crash of September 11 2001. I have now deeper analyses which show that there has been a cover-up of what happened in Washington D.C. on 9/11. This cover-up disproves the thesis of the suicide of an Arab hijacker with a Boeing 757. I must write, sadly, that it enforces a terrible hypotheses : a tricky attack planned and executed by people from inside the United States of America in order to manipulate public opinion and, finally, drive this country into a war in Asia. Here are the materials and the analysis.

The video

The following three pictures are extracted from the video shown on CNN site, and said to origin from the department of defense (dod) and to have been shot by the pentagon's parking cctv on September 11 2001.

Frame 1 Frame 2

Frame 3

The authentic character of this video has never been denied by the authorities. It is possible to remark on image 2 that the camera has moved, not to say "bounced on it's support". On the upper-left and upper-right corners of the images appear some fuzzy details, probably located on the glass of the booth. This move corresponds to the arrival at the camera's location of the shockwave transmitted by the ground, which propagates much faster than the shockwave transmitted by the air. The images have probably been cropped with an image processing software, in order to let them viewed in an animation without being disturbed by this effect of move of the camera (see the legend cropped on the lower left part of image 2).

Complete pictures

I recently found on Minneapolis / St Paul Star web site the uncropped photos, apparently originating from AP (Associated Press ?) and published on march 7 2002. It is obvious, on these frames, that the camera bounces on it's support on frame N 2.

Frame 1 Frame 2 Frame 3

Frame 4

Frame 5

The camera location can be seen on the following image (bottom right). Some interesting places have been indexed (in yellow). The presumed plane trajectory has been plotted in violet.


The video (animated gif)
animation The general impression, at first look, is that something very fast is happening, and has been partially captured by the camera.
Frame 1
first frame Just above the yellow cabinet (housing of the id card reader ?) we can see a black stuff, which suggests the tail of the plane. At the right of this cabinet, two white smoke clouds. Said to be vortexes created by the plane and/or smoke from the engines.
Note the "free" space between the left of the yellow cabinet and the front of the pentagon : the plane must go through this space from the position on frame 1 (partially hidden by the yellow cabinet) to it's supposed position inside the Pentagon after the crash. A further analysis will show that this space is around 70 m long.
Frame 2
second frame The supposed tail of the plane has disappeared. The explosion blast comes out from the pentagon front. The white color, as explained by a French explosives expert indicates the presence of a very fast propagating explosion front, caused by a solid explosive and not at all the burning of kerosene. Compare with the orange / black explosion cloud produced by the planes on the wtc towers.
Note also that the white track (vortex or engine smoke) extends now to the left up to the point where it disappears in the explosion front. If it has been caused by the plane, it must have gone through this space.
Frame 3
third frame The explosion blast extends. The white color has been replaced now by a nice red. Sign that very hot gases expand.
Note also that the white track has quite disappeared on the right of the yellow cabinet, which seems to prove that it was a vortex rather than smoke from an engine. The extension of the explosion front, from the previous frame, could be estimated between 20 and 30 meters, by reference to the pentagon front height (24 m). Divided by sound propagation speed in air (300 m/s), this gives a delay between 66 ms and 100 ms. This would give frame rates of, respectively 15 and 10 frames / second : a rate lower than standard video cameras (25 or 30 frames / second), but classical for surveillance cctv cameras which often operate at these slower rates.

Why there are "lost" frames

If we don't focus on the assumed presence of a flying object having caused this explosion but only on the explosion itself, frames 1 and 2 can't be in succession in the film, separated by 100 ms. Assuming that the blast propagation in the air occurs at a rather regular speed, close from the sound speed in the air (300 m/s), we should see at least one frame showing the beginning of the explosion, perhaps more !

Why, if there is no lost frame, this can't be a 757

Assuming that there are no lost frames, and that a 757 has moved from frame 1 (hidden by yellow cabinet) to frame 2 (masked by explosion) between frame 1 and 2, in 66 to 100 ms, we must admit that this plane has covered a distance equal to :

L + S

L = 40 m : It's length to appear completely at the left of the yellow cabinet
S = 40 m (minimum) 70 m minus the radius of the fireball
The speed of the 757 should so be at least 80 m in 100 ms, which gives a speed of 800 m/s, or 2880 km/h (mach 2.5). I suppose it's not even necessary to ask the engineers of Boeing to know if this is possible.

If this was a 757, how many frames have been lost ?

If we assume that the 757 was about full speed, 900 km/h, or 250 m/s, the necessary time to fly over 80 m is 320 ms. This means that three frames have been lost. There is, obviously, a total lack of chance to loose the three frames of this video on which the 757 could be seen, crossing majestuously the space between the yellow cabinet and the pentagon, and crashing itself on the wall of the pentagon !

Why it can't be a 757

Thierry Meyssan first emitted this "missing 757" theory in his book "L'effroyable imposture", followed by Pentagate.

The severe attacks against the person of Thierry Meyssan, more than against his theory, have reinforced this theory to the eyes of those who know what are the usual way of doing of "under control medias".

From an engineer's point of view, it is obvious that it could not be a 757 seeing the web site of : XOX , who made a fantastic 3D reconstitution : see for example image below. The cross-bars in some windows are not even broken at the exact place where the plane wings should have hit the building !

See also aerial photo on "defenselink" web site :

From the same point of view, the way materials of a 100 tons plane should move and what destruction they should cause in a crash against a building like the pentagon reinforce this impossibility.

Taking as references images of crashes against buildings, (the El Al 747 in Amsterdam - crash description, photos -, Concorde of Air France at Roissy), it seems evident that the scene of the Pentagon and surroundings after the crash (the lawn intact, ...) is not the scene of a 757 crash. See one of the first photos taken after the crash (the firemen have not yet arrived), with it's situation perspective : in yellow the edges of the photo, in violet the plane's trajectory.

The approach of a 757 towards this building leave a lot of questions unanswered (realism of the approach trajectory, position of the impact point, no track of the landing gear on the grass though it gets down automatically near the ground, ...).

This would explain why these frames have been "lost" : they are those on which one can recognize that it this not this airliner which hit the pentagon. The first to claim for this theory was the French journalist Thierry Meyssan : according to him, something (a missile, a remotely piloted plane) was directed on the pentagon, in order to increase the gravity of the attack of Bin Laden on 9/11, the pentagon being a military target. The various materials available, including the cctv images released by the DOD must be analyzed carefully, in order to try to confirm or infirm this hypothesis.

Analysis of image 1 of the cctv.

Here below the image, with art lines added in yellow. The presumed trajectory of the plane has been cut into three zones :

  • From the right edge of image up to the yellow cabinet (35 pixels, 6,2 % of image width).
  • Behind the yellow cabinet (46 pixels, 8,1%).
  • From the yellow cabinet up to the front of the pentagon (89 pixels, 15,6%).

The camera's horizon has been drawn on the image, and also the realist approach trajectory in violet (see below in the text).

Analyse 1

The following image is extracted from an aerial view. Over it have been drawn the lines corresponding to the lateral limits of the cctv field. A line has been plotted, perpendicular to the axis of the camera, which corresponds to a vertical plane homothetic to the sensor of the camera. On this line have been reported the percentages measured on the previous image. Drawing the lines from the camera up to this line, the trajectory of the plane (confirmed by the destroying in the pentagon and the struck lamp poles) is intersected.

Analyse 2

On this trajectory can be found :

  • 95 m above the road, which is around 6 m higher than the ground of the heliport. The plane flies at the height of the upper part of the lamp poles which are located on the border of this road.
  • 65 m of embankment, to join the level of the heliport (slope 10%).
  • 28 m above the heliport, in the visible zone on the right of the yellow cabinet on image 1.
  • 35 m hidden behind the yellow cabinet.
  • 72 m up to the impact point on the pentagon front, seen at the left of the yellow cabinet
  • 84 m of deep penetration inside the pentagon, from the front up to the last "punch out" hole out of C ring.

These distances can be reported on a cut drawing along the presumed trajectory of the plane (in violet). Lamp poles have been plotted in blue, and the horizon of the cctv camera in yellow : an horizontal plane 1.3 m high above the heliport ground.

Analyse 3

Facts :

  • The smoke on the right of the yellow cabinet on image 1 is 7 pixels high, i.e. 5 m at the distance where it is seen from the camera (275 m).
  • The horizon line is at around 1.3 m from ground (height of camera).
  • This smoke being below the horizon line, it so "penetrates" inside the ground of around 4 m.
  • The approximate trajectory underlined by this smoke implies that the plane, after having flown over the road (approximately at the height of the top of the lamp poles) has taken a steep descent along the embankment (on 65 m) and has made a brutal pitch change to fly under a level of 1.3 m above the ground (4 feet), and this up to the pentagon's front.
  • On Ron Harvey's web site, it is shown that the lamp pole which is precisely at the bottom of this embankment, on the limit of the heliport, has been touched (apparently on it's upper part).

Conclusions :

  • The smoke made by a plane (vortex of exhaust) cannot extend below ground level : it is faked.
  • A plane cannot at the same time hit the top of a lamp pole, at around 10 m above ground and fly under a level of 1.3 m above ground.
  • Whatever is the model of plane or missile, fly down an embankment and instantly take an horizontal flight level under 1.3 m from ground is impossible.
  • If we add that the plane is said to be a Boeing 757 and the presumed pilot, Hani Hanjour, had been considered by his instructors as unable to land with a Cessna 172, this could be a good joke if there was not the circumstances, the number of victims and the consequences.
  • The pseudo trajectory that suggests the smoke is indeed an ascending trajectory regarding to the horizon line : the unidentified flying object should fly under the ground level before emerging from the grass of the embankment, at the limit of the heliport, and then keep on ascending to go and hit the pentagon's front at a few meters height above the ground !
  • The only realistic trajectory is the one plotted in violet. A 757 would have to fly around 150 m from the apparition of it's nose on the right of the image up to the disappearance of it's tail inside the explosion fireball of image 2, flying over the yellow cabinet and not behind it. At a speed of 250 m/s, it would have needed 600 ms to do it : the cctv camera could not miss it.

The fraud :

  • The smoke which seems to be left by the plane on images 1 and 2 has been made by an infographist who had no idea of perspective and 3D construction. See the realist trajectory in violet.
  • The tail of a virtual plane has been drawn over the yellow cabinet. The presence of this tail and of the smoke are intended to prove that there has been a plane and that, unfortunately, the camera could not see it.
  • The images can have been cropped on the right, to avoid to show the lamp pole (must be just on the right of the image edge), the embankment and the bridge over the highway.
  • Adding this smoke on images 1 and 2, and an artificial black horizontal band on images 3, 4 and 5 allows to hide the downer part of this embankment.
  • Either the camera was tilted on it's support in the booth (which is possible), or the image has been rotated by software to let the horizon line be ascending from the left to the right, which gives the illusion that the trajectory corresponding to the smoke is horizontal or a little descending, though it is geometrically ascending.
  • As I already stated on my former web site, several frames have been lost on which the flying object must be seen flying to the pentagon and hitting it.

Analysis of image 2 of cctv

An excellent paper can be found in the Guardian's analysis, discussing the explosion at the pentagon, with a plot showing that the red color seen ahead of the heliport control tower is faked and has been added by an infographist.
I don't agree with this analysis and I think that, except the virtual smoke left by the virtual plane, this image is true, here is why.

Image 2

Facts :

  • The move of the camera inside the booth is very realistic. The camera bounces on it's support when the shockwave created by the explosion arrives at this place. This shockwave propagates at a speed between 2000 and 6000 m/s, which are the speeds inside ground of different types of seismic waves. The explosion takes place at around 180 m from the camera. The seismic waves need between 30 and 90 ms (milliseconds) to propagate to the camera.
    If the camera bounces 1 cm over it's support, the time necessary for reaching the upper part of this bounce is 45 ms. For 2 cm, 64 ms. For 5 cm, 101 ms. In the hypothesis of a fast compression seismic wave and a 1 cm bounce, image 2 has been shot 75 ms after the explosion. In the hypothesis of a slower transversal seismic wave and a camera bounce of 5 cm, image 2 has been shot 191 ms after the explosion.
  • The front of the extending fireball that develops on a quasi spherical way from the explosion point moves at a trans-sonic speed (300 m/s). It's extension can be estimated two times the height of the pentagon (24 m), ie around 48 m. The time elapsed from the explosion is so around 160 ms, perhaps a little less if we consider that in the first 20 m of the fireball extension the speed is supersonic : considering a delay between 100 and 160 ms seems obvious.
  • The red color that can be seen on the right of the fireball near the ground and ahead of the heliport control tower corresponds to the presence of a very hot plasma which ionizes air. This plasma is created by the plasma jet created by a hollow charge of explosives, traveling at speeds around 20 times the sonic speed, i.e. 6000 m/s. This jet being directed towards the inner part of the building, what can be seen outside is made of particles reflected by collisions with building parts (pillars, walls) and getting off the building through the openings. The direct trajectory of this plasma before being reflected is around 6 to 18 m, which gives a time of 1 to 3 ms. It's trajectory after reflexion is around 30 to 50 m, with a speed that can be estimated reasonably between one sixth and one half of the initial speed, i.e. 1000 to 3000 m/s, which gives a reflected fly time comprised between 10 and 50 ms. The total time elapsed between the hollow charge explosion and the arrival of an ionized plasma on the zone ahead the control tower must be comprised between 7 and 53 ms.

Conclusions :

  • It is probable, if image 2 is not faked, that a strong hollow charge has exposed, sending a plasma jet at high speed inside the building.
  • The demonstration presented in the Guardian's paper, according to which these red clouds are faked, because would need a faster travel than the front of propagation of the fireball are just a misunderstanding of the fact that the plasma jets created by a hollow charge travel very fast.
  • If the probable delay between the explosion and image 2 is to be considered from 100 to 150 ms, it can be concluded that the red color ahead the control tower is made of tracks of plasma fading, or that the need for this plasma to get out from the building through it's openings (said to be particularly reinforced), or the existence of multi-travels inside the building, have delayed it so that it propagates there 100 or 150 ms later.
  • If an infographist is dumb enough to try to make us believe that a plane can fly under the ground level, it is highly improbable that he is not able to invent realistic physical effects such as the high speed propagation of seismic shockwaves or ionized plasma.

The fraud :

  • As was demonstrated on image 1, the trajectory of the virtual plane showed by the virtual smoke is not realistic : this smoke has been made by infography.
  • As on image 1, the horizon line is not horizontal.
  • This image should be the fifth or the sixth of the series, even more if the plane had a speed estimated around 600 km/h, as some witnesses said.

Analysis of the "red letters" wreckage pieces

Mark Faram and several other persons have shot pictures of this wreckage piece on the awn of the pentagon. It can be found also on a live video from CBS.

Debris 1
Debris 2 Debris 3

Mark Faram, one of the photographer, explained in what circumstances he had seen and photographed this piece. It's presence on several photos shot by several people seems to authentify it.

An analysis of the possible position of the red letter with a round edge and a white border, in the lateral marking of the Boeing 757 lost by American Airlines shows that only a few zones are in correspondence : see the image below extracted of the analysis of Sarah Roberts.


On this image, I have added, in yellow, the marking of the radius of the round edge. I estimate it around 60 cm, regarding the height of a window of the cabin (~40 cm) and to the height of the plane's door (~2m).

The problem here is the scale. If we analyze the picture below, it is obvious that the wreckage piece is ahead of the red pick-up which is visible on the left of the picture. I have drawn, on a selection of this picture, a comparison of the radius of the wheel of this pick-up and of the round edge of the red letter. I estimate this radius from 20 to 30 cm.

Debris 4 situation

This can be confirmed by examining another piece of wreckage, on which appears the "C" letter. Comparing the size of this letter with the width of the door on the control tower wall (~70 cm), it seems that the size of this "C" letter is around 60 cm. This is to be compared with the size of the "C" letter, around 1.5 m, on the body of the B 757.

lettre c 1 lettre c 2

Facts :

  • The presence of these wreckage pieces on several pictures authentify them.
  • The radius of the edge of the red letter is two to three times smaller that the one found in the logos "American Airlines" painted on the Boeing 757.
  • The "C" letter on the wrecked piece is 2.5 times smaller than the "C" letter on the body of the B 757.
  • The witnesses can be divided into two groups : those who perceived the average dimensions of the plane and have seen a small commuter jet, and those who perceived the logo and colors, the general appearance of the plane, and recognized a B 757 or an Airbus of American Airlines.

Conclusions :

  • Somebody painted an "American" logo two to three times smaller than a B757 one's on the body of the plane which dived into the pentagon.
  • If this logo has been painted two to three times smaller, it is because this plane was about two to three times smaller than a B 757 and that it was a trick to make it seen as the flight 77 for somebody looking at it from far away.
  • All witnesses have seen the same plane, but it is so highly unthinkable that a small plane could be disguised to look like an American Airlines airliner that nobody thought one second to this hypotheses.

Analysis of the engine wreckage pieces

The picture below shows interesting wreckage pieces.

engine piece

A rotor (high pressure stage) coming from an jet engine can be seen. On the top left of the image, what seems to be the housing of this engine. On the right, the leg of somebody working on the site gives approximately the scale.

Facts :

  • this is a high pressure rotor element of a jet engine
  • the diameter of the housing is not much bigger than the diameter of this rotor,
  • most of the witnesses heard a sound that they describe as the sound of a military aircraft (highly pitched and strident), not the sound of an airliner.

Conclusion :

  • this piece and the housing behind don't come from the engine of an airliner, which has low pressure fans of much larger size than the high pressure rotors, so that the housings are much larger than the diameters of the high pressure rotors.
  • The engines of this plane had no low pressure fans : they are military engines, for which noise is not a problem.

The fraud :

  • This photo proves that internal jet engines pieces survived the crash and didn't vaporize, as was stupidly said. See the photos of Air France Concorde (BEA photo) which disintegrated and burnt against a building.
  • Where are the others pieces of the engine ?
  • Where are the pieces of the other engine if this plane had really two of them ?

This would need to be confirmed by the engineers in Pratt & Whitney or another company making these sort of engines. BTW, the rotor shown is really a characteristic piece : I don't understand, if it was a piece of a B 757, that in any part of the world lot of people wouldn't have already recognized it. Would it be a part coming from a military engine ? Which web site will come first with a picture of this rotor shot at manufacturing or at maintenance stage ?

Analysis of other wreckage pieces

The photo below shows an interesting wreckage piece.

piece zarbi

Facts :

  • This piece seems correspond to a mobile organ on the plane (flaps, ...).
  • It is very characteristic : any person having seen it during manufacturing or maintenance should be able to recognize it.

Conclusion :

  • If the official information services from the DOD don't have yet claimed to the media that "this piece of wreckage is (for example) the movement transmission for the left flap servo-command of a B 757", it is probably because this doesn't come from a B 757...

The cruise missile theory

What flying object could it be ? Hypotheses : it is an AGM 86 cruise missile.

cruise missile

Source :

The model on the left would be more suitable. The two red military loads inside the missile are ( broach type, see description ) :

  • On the front a conventional explosive, shaped as an "hollow charge", whose aim is to dig a hole in a wall, but limited to a few meter in action.
  • On the back, an uranium load. This metal has the property to explode when projected on solid materials, creating a plasma inside which the mass of metal propagates. On a smaller scale, this principle is used to destroy tanks.

This type of missile and charge would explain the traces on the pentagon building :

  • visible limited destruction where the two short wings of the missile hit the front of the building
  • 4 x 4 m hole in the front : where the hollow charge exploded.
  • important wreckage in the first building : action zone of the hollow charge
  • small (2 m diameter) and nicely dug holes in the inner buildings and their walls : action of the uranium load.

Arguments for the "cruise missile theory"

What pushes to think that this could be an AGM 86 cruise missile with an uranium load is the fact that the ground in front of the explosion site was covered of sand very quickly after the crash :

The good reason could be to protect people from the remains of this metal, known to cause severe long term intoxications (also known as the "gulf war syndrome"), and/or a way do make the proofs of the presence of uranium disappear. Note that there should be in that case lot of it on the shoes and dining room carpet of all those (firemen, rescue teams) who went on this site before it was covered by sand. Specialized teams in charge of taking the debris out of the building, later, were dressed with protection clothes and decontaminate themselves after working on the site.

Another argument is the noise produced by the object, said to be very strident by the witnesses, as this of a fighter or a missile and not like the noise of a big airliner.

Several witnesses, among whose experimented military experts located inside the pentagon, have reported to feel the explosion like a heavy bomb explosion (noise, shockwave, thermal wave, smell of cordite), and not as the impression of the crash of a plane.

Donald Rumsfeld himself had a slip of the tongue and referred to a missile hitting the Pentagon.

Arguments agains the "cruise missile" theory

  • The plane which has hit the pentagon had a long approach trajectory, flying along a quasi perfect 270 turn over the city, followed by a linear final approach. None of the witnesses has described a cruise missile, except some of them saying that it finally ran straight into the pentagon as if it was electronically locked onto it's target.
  • The witnesses can be divided into two groups : those who have seen a Boeing 757 (or even an airbus 320 said one of them), some of them saying they had recognized the markings of American Airlines, and those who have seen a small commuter jet (the necessary size for a dozen people on board).

The false airliner theory

Let us consider the following scenario (see complete timeline). 

  1. Bin Laden has prepared an attack involving four hijacked planes.
  2. The US official are warned of this attack, by several channels, the most serious being the minister of foreign affairs of the Taliban regime who tried to open by this way a negotiation with the U.S. officials.
  3. It is decided to leave this attack be held, though discretely organizing to limit the human losses, to create a psychological shock on the American people and to create the necessary conditions to open a war in the middle east.
  4. On 9/11, four planes are hijacked at the same time. According to the procedures, the NORAD gets the information from the FAA.
  5. A hijacked plane hits the first tower of wtc. Within 15 mn, almost everybody has the information (I had it in France at my office, the wife of a colleague having received a mail from somebody watching CNN in the USA, and having phoned to her husband).
  6. A second hijacked plane hits the second tower of wtc. Everybody, including people in France who follow in real time the events on internet, know that this is not an accident but an attack.
  7. The NORAD, which obviously has at least the same information than the French public, is by some ways locked by the conspiracy.
  8. An officer of the NORAD, who doesn't know that there is a conspiracy going on, or who didn't want to get into it, has sent fighters to intercept the two others hijacked planes (flight 93 and flight 77).
  9. The two planes are intercepted. They refuse to obey the visual control signals from the fighters. They are fired. According to some witnesses, both of them in Pennsylvania. More probably in the mountains of Virginia for flight 77.
  10. An emergency solution has been setup for the case where these planes would be fired. A small twin engine plane, with a silhouette looking like a 757 (and the more if seen from below) has been prepared. Some rumors say it could be a navy's Vicking S3 (dragon fire). Some pieces of body have been added or transformed to disguise it at the best, it has been equipped with a distance piloting equipment (global hawk, radio command), has been painted with the colors of American Airlines and loaded with a BROACH type bomb (as in the cruise missile described above, but perhaps greater size).
  11. This plane takes off from an airport close to Washington DC (a witness has followed it in sight from this moment up to it's crash).
  12. A C 130 flies in the surroundings, with the pilot of this remotely piloted plane on it's board. It follows closely this plane, taking in charge the last part of the trajectory on a video monitor.
  13. This video system lacking some resolution, as the bomb plane is set full throttle, he doesn't see the lamp poles at the crossroads between highways 27 and 244. The shocks are not destructive for the plane, but bend the lamp poles and pull some of them out, probably causing the bomb plane to be close to crash on the ground of the pentagon's heliport. The pilot succeeds already in stabilizing the trajectory.
  14. At the impact time, the C 130 veers and gets away from the explosion.
  15. The hollow charge and perhaps the energy of some heavy part of the plane (landing gear, engines) destroy heavily the structures of the first pentagon building (E ring).
  16. Apart from these heavy parts (landing gear, motors), the plane is completely destroyed, transformed in a shower of aluminum confettis as some witnesses said.
  17. The depleted uranium load of the bomb plays it's role of penetration, getting deeply inside the inner buildings, penetrating through walls and floors.
  18. Within a few hours, the officials have to understand what exactly happened. Probably they knew in a short delay that two of the hijacked planes were shot by fighters : the pilots who fired the two airliners must have done their reports by radio or after landing.
  19. People not inside the conspiracy but who know that two planes have been fired must try to understand what has hit the pentagon. They can be confused on the total number of hijacked planes.
  20. People inside the conspiracy, as the original plan was to crash flights 77 and 93 on Washington DC, can think that this has really happened and they give this explanation to the attack.
  21. In a meeting, perhaps just with military officials, perhaps involving political authorities like the vice president in the white house bunker or even George Bush in his "air force one" plane, it is decided that the information will not bee given to the public that two airliners have been shot by the USAF. For flight 93, it will be said that a revolt of the hijacked passengers turned to the crash of the plane. For flight 77, it will be announced that it crashed on the pentagon.
  22. As the evidence that flight 77 didn't crash on the pentagon takes more and more importance in the media, George Bush and it's team want to maintain their official version of the facts, stacking bullshit over bullshit, just to the point where it represents now a huge heap.

Arguments for the "false airliner theory"

All the arguments above, in favor of the "cruise missile" theory apply to this theory. Other arguments can be found.

The description of a small commuter jet that many witnesses gave.

The plane's noise, as described by the witnesses, which indicates that the engines are small size : the large engines of modern airliners have a high dilution rate which makes their noise far less strident.

The size of this plane and it's mass, though less than those of a 757, could explain the location of the hit lamp poles and their severe damages. It's more difficult to imagine that with a smaller and lighter cruise missile.

A cruise missile doesn't make a descent with a 270 turn a few seconds before arriving on it's target : it would make it less precise.

The Pennsylvania state police have first reported to have two crash sites.

Arguments against these theories

The more serious argument in favor of the crash of a large airplane, about 100 ft wingspan, is the analysis of the lamp poles hit by the plane before crashing on the pentagon : see The analysis of Ron Harvey. Difficult to make one's mind about this fact without going on the site, measuring, seeing the lamp poles debris ... Just two hypotheses :

  • One of the lamp pole could have been damaged by a heavy debris thrown by the blast, coming from inside the pentagon (piece of concrete...) or from outside (piece of a car, truck or helicopter).
  • The hole dug by the explosion into the pentagon has the shape of a cylinder. The blast creates a shock wave towards the exterior, precisely guided by this cylinder. This shock wave could have propagate to the lamp poles, which are precisely on the axis of this cylinder, and damage one or several of them.

If one lamp pole or more have been damaged without having been directly hit by the plane, there could be no conclusion about the plane's size. Looking carefully to the images on Ron Harvey's web site, it seems to be the case for pole N 2, (now number 4, after Ron Harvey modified his web site) which lays on the grass at some distance (10 m ?) from it's original position, in the opposite direction of the pentagon.

Analyses / links

It is possible to have more technical information about the pentagon crash, surfing on the following web sites :

Political arguments can be found on the following sites, much of them being oriented towards a "conspiracy theory" :

Since it is known that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was foreseen, and that the FBI ordered and organized JF Kennedy murder, there is no obvious reason to give any credit to the administration and government of the US. 9/11 attack and the cover-up which followed it, including the infamous "patriot act", are just like a remake of these scandals. In other words, there have been precedents in history which prove that there can be such conspiracies / public opinion manipulations from US officials.


The theories described above are technically realistic. If one of them is true, it implies that the US officials were warned of Bin Laden plans, but decided to leave them executed (same scenario as for Pearl Harbor). The fact that a cruise missile or a specially disguised plane would have been prepared to crash onto the pentagon, in case where flights 77 and 93 couldn't fulfill their suicide mission, would prove that the conspiracy was setup long before the September 11 dramatic events.

The fact that flights 93 and 77 have been deliberately "neutralized" by the air force, and the will to hide this fact to the public could be understood. The pain for the victims families is less important if they think that their relatives died from the direct or indirect action of terrorists, rather than from the action of an American fighter. But it would be crazy and completely unreal to think that, to hide that these planes have been fired by necessity, the pentagon should be attacked with a depleted uranium bomb !

There can be questions also to whether or not a conspiracy involved the Bush government and civil officials, or was limited to military circles. It could, in this later case, be linked to the "war declaration" of defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld to the pentagon bureaucracy, on September 10 : the day before the attack !

The main problem today is that a growing number of persons, outside the USA first, and now inside, consider that there has been a conspiracy and a cover-up. If this is the truth, George bush and/or some of his administration members should be considered like Saddam Hussein, i.e. being able to mass murder their own people for internal politics and/or strategic goals : control the American people and press the country into a war clearly intended to control a vital energy source on the long term.

It's time to say the truth. The best way would be for the FBI / DOD to

  1. release the missing frames of the above video
  2. release the cctv video of the "mysterious hotel" (the Sheraton National ?) known to have been viewed by the hotel employees, shocking them. See point of view, the pentagon being just on the left of the picture or from the window ...

  3. release the NEXCOMM/CITGO-gas station video : see point of view ..., source and witnessing.

  4. Release other videos or photos like the Virginia department of transports's, or from the sites over which "flight 77" flew on 9/11.
  5. allow independent experts to examine the debris of the crash on the pentagon, with witnesses having gathered these debris to identify them,
  6. conducts a public enquiry in Pennsylvania and Virginia to find the sites of crash,
  7. make some holes in the newly brought materials on the pentagon helicopter field, down to the original soil, and verify that there is no uranium on it.

Public opinion, inside the United States and outside, must ask the United States senate and Congress to open an investigation on pentagon crash. Senators and congressmen must know the truth. They must know how and why the Bush administration has engaged their country into dreadfull conflicts in the middle east. Sign the petition on line !

This web site is dedicated to all the victims of 9/11/2001 attack.
Jean-Pierre Desmoulins, planet





The Power Hour:
(7-10am CST)
Listen Live

Listen FREE thru Global Star Satellite Feed






All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

Copyright © 2007. The Power Hour. All rights reserved.